Welfare moms bring out the Republican in me

[dilloduck]

wow what a losers mentality

encouraging irresponsiblilty and dependency is a real winner too.

 

[antagon]

i dont emulate it, but okay. by your logic i could say im jealous that people in prison get free healthcare, so therefore i want to be in prison.

you're the one who proposed dipping to cockroach status to eat from the spoils they're distributed. i just pointed out that like your statement above, since you're a dude, you'll do that shit in prison.

 

[topspin]

I guess lower middle class worry about the underclass getting some of thier pie.

I think it's tiny in comparrison to other spending, my eye was always turned to the rich to see what they were doing not the poor.

 

[wyomingpatriot]

i'm going to prison? youre an idiot

 

[Douger]

We are the richest country in the history of man. We spend trillions to bomb people of color, and your major problem is poor children being fed by welfare. SAD

No. You're the most indebted nation in the history of the world and when your Chinese masters say it's time, you'll see hyperinflation that you wont even believe.
Ya better make 100 grand a year, or more, or you'll all be starving with the little niglets.
You've been at war with China for 60 years and now it's official. Your ass has been kicked.

As to the welfare moms ? Spay the whores.

 

[antagon]

idiots see benefit chick's life style as enviable and ponder either emulating it, or fascist retribution.

antagon has no womb, chick nor child.

Actually, lots of us just resent having to pay for other people's kids. You want kids, fine. Pay for 'em. I choose differently.... I don't ask you to pay for my choices.

part and parcel of living and making a living in large modern economies is dealing with the communicability of other people's choices along with your own. it works both ways -- cyclical in fact.

without saying that entitlements ought to be a free-for-all, there's just as little dignity in deriding single mothers on benefits as there is in being one.

 

[bodecea]

Retread on Aisle 2

Not Hannity here.

 

[topspin]

We are the richest country in the history of man. We spend trillions to bomb people of color, and your major problem is poor children being fed by welfare. SAD

No. You're the most indebted nation in the history of the world and when your Chinese masters say it's time, you'll see hyperinflation that you wont even believe.
Ya better make 100 grand a year, or more, or you'll all be starving with the little niglets.
You've been at war with China for 60 years and now it's official. Your ass has been kicked.

As to the welfare moms ? Spay the whores.

thanks dufus whou couldn't cut it here, I'm sure the third world shithole you live in doesn't have the welfare problem.

 

[topspin]

there is a lot of class in deriding the poor, but it's all low.

 

[dilloduck]

idiots see benefit chick's life style as enviable and ponder either emulating it, or fascist retribution.

antagon has no womb, chick nor child.

Actually, lots of us just resent having to pay for other people's kids. You want kids, fine. Pay for 'em. I choose differently.... I don't ask you to pay for my choices.

part and parcel of living and making a living in large modern economies is dealing with the communicability of other people's choices along with your own. it works both ways -- cyclical in fact.

without saying that entitlements ought to be a free-for-all, there's just as little dignity in deriding single mothers on benefits as there is in being one.

and there is dignity in encouraging people to depend on others instead of better themselves?
Allowing someone to choose to live off the hard work of others isn't my idea of a great plan for any economy.

 

[California Girl]

idiots see benefit chick's life style as enviable and ponder either emulating it, or fascist retribution.

antagon has no womb, chick nor child.

Actually, lots of us just resent having to pay for other people's kids. You want kids, fine. Pay for 'em. I choose differently.... I don't ask you to pay for my choices.

part and parcel of living and making a living in large modern economies is dealing with the communicability of other people's choices along with your own. it works both ways -- cyclical in fact.

without saying that entitlements ought to be a free-for-all, there's just as little dignity in deriding single mothers on benefits as there is in being one.

I don't deride them. They have my sympathy.... but not my money.... unless I choose to give it. Which I do... through charity. I would like to see us, as a country, educate our young to achieve something in their lives, to show them that there is more to life than producing children. I guess that makes me a bad person.

 

[wyomingpatriot]

i'm not against the principle of welfare. i have many socialist beliefs. i just believe its misdirected, such as rewarding a 20 year old with no career or education or future for doing what a cockroach can do, and ensuring that elderly invalids see the age of 120.

 

[wyomingpatriot]

not to mention keeping rapists and murderers healthy until the age of 120 as well

 

[Granny]

i'm not against the principle of welfare. i have many socialist beliefs. i just believe its misdirected, such as rewarding a 20 year old with no career or education or future for doing what a cockroach can do, and ensuring that elderly invalids see the age of 120.

So ... you're in favor of euthanasia for the elderly? They have no right to a natural death and their grieving children and grandchildren are just shit out of luck and should stifle their feelings that man should be the decision-maker for who lives and dies?

 

[wyomingpatriot]

yes i believe in euthanizing a 99 year old woman, laying in a bed in a diaper, contracted into a fetal position, on oxygen and endless life support, who is in constant agony, who can no longer speak let alone retain consciousness, cant move, is force fed baby food, who is kept alive only so greedy nursing homes can make millions of dollars off medicaid. isnt that dignified?
judging from your moniker you must not be very far from this becoming a reality to you. my suggestion: live your life while you can

 

[Zoom-boing]

My opinion on this is that people who live on welfare generation after generation have essentially sold their souls to government. I truly believe that if welfare people realized that the system was designed to "keep them in their place" they would look at things differently. When government totally supports them, they have to live their lives under very specific rules and regulations. They end up with substandard housing, the worst schools (both educationally and structurally), there's a sense of worthlessness or hopelessness, the need for better sustenance often leads to crime, it breeds anger.

BUT, people who are willing to live under those circumstances are very easy to "control" and are basically lead to believe that "somebody owes them." As long as they can be kept uneducated and dependent the more they are "kept in their place." With each generation the situation gets worse - like a continually downward spiral.

Are there educational programs and child care programs and what have you? Yes - but how really good are those programs? They're really not designed to help anyone advance upwardly or engender self worth or self improvement. Government doesn't want these people to succeed. That's my opinion. And who are the people who keep pushing for more and more government benefits for the "underprivileged" and "disadvantaged?" It's a good show of "care and concern" but anything that keeps someone "down in their place" is not really helpful, is it?

Welfare in and of itself is a good idea. . . . helping those who have fallen on hard times get back on their feet. The problem arises when, instead of people using welfare as a stepping stone, they see it and use it as a career path.

 

[editec]

You apparently don't know much about your own state.

Wyoming has the lowest rate of welfare recipients of any state or territory in the nation

WYOMINGITE ECONOMY STATS:
Top Stats All Stats View this page with: Just Stats Sources Definitions Both

Employment 281,644[51st of 52]
Gross State Product > Current Dollars $24,308,000,000.00[50th of 56]
Median Earnings for Male Full-Time, Year-Round Workers $40,113.00 [24th of 51]
Median Family Income $54,935.00 [20th of 51]
Median Household Income $44,275.00 [23rd of 51]
Nest Egg Index 97.96[30th of 50]
Percent below poverty level 10.3%[40th of 51]
Percent of Children Below Poverty Level 14 % [36th of 51]
Percent of Households With Retirement Income 15.2 % [41st of 51] Percent of People 65 Years and Over Below Poverty Level 6.1 % [49th of 51]
Percent of Related Children Below Poverty Level 13.6 % [38th of 51]
Personal income $18,473,000,000.00[51st of 51]
Total tax burden $1,504,777,000.00[47th of 50]
Total tax burden (per capita) $2,973.87[2nd of 50]
Unemployment 8,409[52nd of 52]
Unemployment rate 2.9%[51st of 52]
Welfare Caseloads > Percent change in total families -14.4%[50th of 54]
Welfare Caseloads > Percent change in total recipients -19.5%[51st of 54]
Welfare Caseloads > Total families 411[54th of 54] Welfare Caseloads > Total recipients 729[54th of 54]

source

 

[wyomingpatriot]

i agree with what zoom just said. couldnt have put it better.

 

[antagon]

Actually, lots of us just resent having to pay for other people's kids. You want kids, fine. Pay for 'em. I choose differently.... I don't ask you to pay for my choices.

part and parcel of living and making a living in large modern economies is dealing with the communicability of other people's choices along with your own. it works both ways -- cyclical in fact.

without saying that entitlements ought to be a free-for-all, there's just as little dignity in deriding single mothers on benefits as there is in being one.

and there is dignity in encouraging people to depend on others instead of better themselves?
Allowing someone to choose to live off the hard work of others isn't my idea of a great plan for any economy.

but this is how you are an unwitting benefactor of modern economics, despite economies without social safety nets bearing out the consequences of that policy at present.

the only people who i encourage to depend on me, work for me. i encourage them with cash. the government is responsible for entitlements - we pay for them because we have to. what makes the government different to me is that it has the obligation to steward the entire economy with effective principles, rather than bow to the externalities of encouragement and what not. i argue that something should be revised about the way money's redistributed in our economy, but basing that on the presumption that there's a huge surplus of jobs that these moms are turning down because they're lazy wont lead to a practical resolution.

the OP's resolution to criminalize american mothers doesn't crest my dignity bar or that which i set for sound reasoning, either.

 

[wyomingpatriot]

yes, wyoming is very wealthy. alot of rich people, and a narrow middle class. we all see our own microcosoms, i suppose, though i would argue that what i posted is relevent to anywhere in the u.s.